Opioid Prescribing Practices and Training Needs of Québec Family Physicians for Chronic Noncancer Pain

Transitional Pain Care in Quebec: Did We Forget Our Youths? A Brief Research Report

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) represent a unique population with distinct psycho-social risks and care needs. About 10% of AYAs live with chronic pain (CP) and transition to adult pain care between 16 and 25 years of age. These transitions in care happen simultaneously with other bio-psycho-social changes and require flexible multi-disciplinary support models. As it stands, transitional pain care appears suboptimal, fragmented, and opportunistic in Quebec (Canada). The objective of this Brief Report is, therefore, to present our study findings and propose a multi-disciplinary transitional framework vision applicable to AYAs living with CP. Data were collected using a sequential-consensual qualitative design with a longitudinal participatory component. The consecutive stages of this work included an exploratory stage, semi-structured interviews with primary care providers, and inter-disciplinary deliberative stakeholder consultation groups. The deductive inductive thematic approach and the three-level Health Care Transition Research Consortium's theoretical framework were used to analyze the data. A representative group of stakeholders discussed findings from the first two steps, made fifteen actionable recommendations and formulated their vision of a transitional pain care model that can be further adapted in other settings. The study results present important insights into various psycho-social factors associated with transitional pain care for AYAs.

Prevalence of opioid prescriptions in Taiwan (2008-2018)

BACKGROUND

Opioids are effective for severe pain; however, the safety issue is also a primary concern. To better understand the opioid use in Taiwan, we conducted this study.

METHODS

Data on patients with opioid prescriptions, including morphine, fentanyl, pethidine, codeine, oxycodone, hydromorphone, and buprenorphine were collected using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Database (NHID).

RESULTS

Our analysis of opioid prescriptions from 2008 to 2018 in Taiwan indicated that (1) A slow increase in prevalence of opioid prescription was found during the study period. Among the drugs studied, morphine accounted for the majority of the prescriptions written, with a gradual increase annually. Pethidine prescriptions showed a significant and rapid decline over the years; (2) medical centers prescribed the largest number of opioids, followed by regional hospitals, local hospitals, and clinics; (3) the number of prescriptions per year per capita in cancer group was much higher than that in noncancer group. In noncancer group, most of the prescriptions were used in acute pain service (98.7%); and (4) use of opioids increased with age in both cancer and noncancer patients.

CONCLUSION

The total number of opioid prescriptions in Taiwan gradually increased annually, among which morphine was the most commonly used opioid. Cancer patients consumed more opioid prescriptions than noncancer patients and most of the prescriptions in noncancer patients were used in acute pain service. The number of prescriptions increased with the age of the patients in both cancer and noncancer patients. The low prescription rate of opioids in chronic pain in Taiwan is not similar as those in high opioid-consuming countries, such as United States.

Influence of Primary Care Provider Type on Chronic Pain Management Among Veterans

Background

Chronic pain disproportionately impacts veterans and is often treated in primary care, where physician shortages in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) healthcare system are well documented. Nurse practitioners (NPs) may represent a solution to the care shortage; however, concerns of NP opioid overprescribing have led to NP practice and prescribing restrictions in individual VHA facilities and at the state level. Little is known regarding the prescribing patterns of NPs and physician assistants (PAs) for veterans with chronic pain in the VHA.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare opioid and non-opioid prescribing patterns of physicians, NPs, and PAs for chronic pain patients at VHA centers.

Methods

We used data from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Survey of Healthcare Experience of Patients and Corporate Data Warehouse from October 2015 to September 2016. Patient medical records for the year were analyzed by provider type (physician, NP, or PA) for differences in providers' rates of prescribing opioid and non-opioid medications, as well as characteristics of the opioid prescriptions (e.g., high daily morphine milligram equivalent [90 MME/day] dose, long-term opioid therapy [90 days]).

Results

Medical records of a total of 39,936 patients were included. In FY 2016, 55% of patients received one opioid prescription, whereas 83.8% received one non-opioid prescription. Compared to patients of NPs and PAs, patients of physicians had higher odds of receiving opioid (vs. NPs: OR = 1.13, p < 0.01; vs. PAs: OR = 1.16, p < 0.01) and non-opioid prescriptions (vs. NPs: OR=1.08, p = 0.02; vs. PAs: OR=1.20, p < 0.01) after adjusting for patient characteristics. There were no differences in high MME/day dose (p = 0.59) or long-term opioid therapy (p = 0.99).

Conclusion

In a national sample of veterans with chronic pain, NPs and PAs did not have higher odds of opioid prescribing. Concerns of NP or PA opioid overprescribing may be addressed by considering evidence that patients of these providers are not at higher odds of receiving an opioid prescription.

The Oxford Catalogue of Opioids: A systematic synthesis of opioid drug names and their pharmacology

AIM

The growing demand for analgesia, coupled with an increasing need to treat opioid dependence and overdose, has escalated the development of novel opioids. We aimed to quantify the number of opioid drugs developed and to catalogue them based on their pharmacology.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of seven sources in November 2020, including the WHO's Anatomical Therapeutic Classification index, the British National Formulary, the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology, the International Narcotics Control Board Index of Names of Narcotic Drugs, the WHO's International Nonproprietary Names MedNet service, Martindale's Extra Pharmacopoeia and the Merck Index, to include opioid drugs that targeted or had an effect or coeffect at one or more opioid receptors. We extracted chemical and nonproprietary names, drug stems, molecular formulas, molecular weights, receptor targets, actions at opioid receptors and classes based on their origins. We used descriptive statistics and calculated medians and interquartile ranges where appropriate.

RESULTS

We identified 233 opioid drugs and created an online resource (https://www.catalogueofopioids.net/). There were 10 unique drug stems, and "-fentanil" accounted for one-fifth (20%) of all opioids. Most of the drugs (n = 133) targeted mu-opioid receptors and the majority (n = 191) were agonists at one or more receptors. Most (82%) were synthetic opioids, followed by semisynthetic opioids (16%) and alkaloids (3%).

CONCLUSION

This catalogue centralizes and disseminates information that could assist researchers, prescribers and the public to improve the safe use of opioids.

Patterns, trends and determinants of medical opioid utilization in Canada 2005-2020: characterizing an era of intensive rise and fall

BACKGROUND

Into the 21st century, the conflation of high rates of chronic pain, systemic gaps in treatment availability and access, and the arrival of potent new opioid medications (e.g., slow-release oxycodone) facilitated strong increases in medical opioid dispensing in Canada. These persisted until post-2010 alongside rising opioid-related adverse (e.g., morbidity/mortality) outcomes. We examine patterns, trends and determinants of opioid dispensing in Canada, and specifically its 10 provinces, for the years 2005-2020.

METHODS

Raw data on prescription opioid dispensing were obtained from a large national community-based pharmacy database (IQVIA/Compuscript), converted into Defined-Daily-Doses/1,000 population/day for 'strong' and 'weak' opioid categories per standard methods. Dispensing by opioid category and formulations by province/year was assessed descriptively; regression analysis was applied to examine possible segmentation of over-time strong opioid dispensing.

RESULTS

All provinces reported starkly increasing strong opioid dispensing peaking 2011-2016, and subsequent marked declines. About half reported lower strong opioid dispensing in 2020 compared to 2005, with continuous inter-provincial differences of > 100 %; weak opioids also declined post-2011/12. Segmented regression suggests breakpoints for strong opioids in 2011/12 and 2015/16, coinciding with main interventions (e.g., selective opioid delisting, new prescribing guidelines) towards more restrictive opioid utilization control.

CONCLUSIONS

We characterized an era of marked rise and fall, while featuring stark inter-provincial heterogeneity in opioid dispensing in Canada. While little evidence for improvements in pain care outcomes exists, the starkly inverting opioid utilization have been associated with extensive population-level harms (e.g., misuse, morbidity, mortality) over-time. This national case study raises fundamental questions for opioid-related health policy and practice.

Assessing Practice Patterns and Influential Factors for Nurse Practitioners Who Manage Chronic Pain

INTRODUCTION

Challenges exist in caring for chronic pain patients, such as preventing opioid-related adverse events, a lack of available non-pharmacologic alternatives, and limitations in prescriptive authority. Nurse practitioners are well-suited to manage chronic pain due to their holistic approach to care and growing numbers in primary care. Yet little is known about the chronic pain care given by NPs. As such, the purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of NPs who manage chronic pain, and to examine how these experiences impact NP prescribing patterns in chronic pain management.

METHODS

We developed the 31-item NP Chronic Pain Prescribing Practices survey. We collected data from N = 128 NPs at the American Association of Nurse Practitioners (AANP) conference. Pearson chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were utilized for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

NPs reported high levels of agreement with nearly all the presented challenges. MSN-prepared NPs were more likely than DNP-prepared NPs to report difficulty in managing pain (x 2 = 4.2, p = .04). There were no differences in prescription of chronic pain therapies between NPs of varying practice authority statuses. NPs in specialty care settings were more likely to utilize opioids (x 2 = 13.6, p < .01), while primary care NPs were significantly more likely to use NSAIDs (x 2 = 13.5, p < .01) and Tylenol (x 2 = 3.9, p = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate significant challenges NPs face in chronic pain management. More research is needed to better understand the complexities associated with chronic pain care given by NPs in order to effectively manage chronic pain while still preventing opioid-related adverse events.

Not All Pain is Created Equal: Basic Definitions and Diagnostic Work-Up

Chronic pain is considered a public health priority by the World Health Organization and European health institutions. It has reached alarming proportions in terms of disability, consumption of health and social resources, and impact on primary and specialist care services. Primary care physicians are often called on to manage this condition. Chronic pain management can be challenging due to its complexity. It has traditionally been considered to include nociceptive pain that that persists longer than the normal healing time, neuropathic pain lasting more than 3 months, or a combination of these. More recently, a third descriptor, nociplastic (primary) pain, was added to classify patients with chronic pain conditions such as fibromyalgia, nonspecific back pain, or mixed pain that persists or other conditions in which altered central pain modulation results in central sensitization and chronic pain in the absence of actual or threatened damage to tissues, including in the somatosensory nervous system. This document provides an overview of pain types and their underlying mechanisms. Successful pain management is facilitated by identification of the pain type. A set of diagnostic tools and a pain algorithm are presented to guide the clinician toward the correct diagnosis. The algorithm identifies cases that may require referral to a pain specialist. Once the site of origin of the pain (the "pain generator") is identified, or a primary pain syndrome is suspected, the accompanying article provides information and rationale to support treatment decisions based on patient characteristics.

Opioid epidemic: Does rheumatological practice favors risk for patients? National survey on rheumatologists' opioid prescriptions and compliance to guidelines for strong opioid prescription

OBJECTIVES

Given the scope of rheumatology and its prevalence of pain, it seems needed that a study should focus on prescription habits, in the midst of the international opioid epidemic and given the moderate efficacy of strong opioids in chronic musculoskeletal conditions. We compared rheumatologists' opioid prescribing patterns in non-cancer pain with recommended practice.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of the French health insurance database, including all patients aged 16 years or over reimbursed for at least one strong opioid prescription from a rheumatologist in 2015. A nationwide survey of all registered rheumatologists in France was performed with a 47-item questionnaire in June 2015.

RESULTS

Only 2.4% of the patients receiving a strong opioid in 2015 (n=700,946) had at least one prescription from a rheumatologist. Rheumatologists prescribed mostly morphine, and significantly less oxycodone and fentanyl (P<0.00001) than other specialists. Rheumatologists prescribed a mean of 35.8mg morphine equivalent/day. A response rate of 33.7% was obtained to the questionnaire. Acute musculoskeletal pain was the principal condition for strong opioids prescription, with 94.5% re-evaluating opioid treatment within two weeks of initiation. For efficacy, 80% said that they stopped treatment if no benefit was observed after a test period (mean=1.2 months). Rheumatologists with pain management training were significantly more likely to evaluate pain before prescribing strong opioids (P=0.001), evaluate efficacy within three months (P=0.01) and screen for risk factors for misuse at initiation (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

For non-cancer pain, rheumatologists generally prescribe opioids for short periods, at low doses, mostly according to national recommendations. Pain education strongly affected opioid prescription by rheumatologists.

Opioids Use and Abuse: Prescription Practice, Attitude, and Beliefs among Doctors of Karachi

Background

Opioid analgesics, also known as narcotics, are medicinal drugs used primarily for the management of pain secondary to any type of cancer, severe injury or surgery. Due to the ease of availability, opioids are commonly abused. In 2015, reported deaths exceeded 33,000 Americans from opioid overdose. A survey in 2013 revealed nearly 1.6 million Pakistanis abusing prescription opioids for non-medical needs. Although commonly prescribed by primary care physicians, most of them are diffident to stand by all the recommended strategies to reduce the incidence of opioid abuse.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted during the period of August through October 2018. A sample size of 365 was determined using a 95% confidence interval at a degree of precision of 5%. A 22-item questionnaire was given to doctors with at least two years practicing experience either from a private or a public healthcare setup. Doctors who had never prescribed opioids were excluded from the study. Out of the eligible participants, 15 refused to take part in the survey, and the co-operation rate was recorded as 95.8%. Collected data were analyzed using statistical package for social science (SPSS) version 22 for Windows. Frequencies, percentages, mean, standard deviation, and chi-square were used to explore the variables. The statistical significance level was considered at p < 0.5.

Results

Opioids were reported to be used mainly for treating acute pain (40.5%), chronic pain (24.7%) and both acute and chronic (34.8%). A minority of doctors (29%) screened their patients for opioid addiction. A significant association (p = 0.000) between the frequency of opioid prescription and prior screening for depression was determined. Surprisingly, only 23.2% clinicians frequently screened their patients for depression before prescribing opioids. The rate of counselling regarding drug tapering was found to be 71.6%. A majority, i.e., 88%, of the respondents anticipated the misuse of opioids they prescribe whereas 74% also held a belief that patients self-medicate their untreated pain. Participants reported addiction (54%) as the most common reason for abuse followed by the role of pharmaceutical companies (43%) and pharmacies (41%). About 80.2% clinicians believed that patients addicted to opioids could get well and return to their daily routine.

Conclusion

The rising opioid epidemic is a major concern for doctors prescribing opioids. Adaptation of medical school curricula and appropriate training can equip doctors for better management of patients requiring opioids. This includes the screening of patients using standard risk assessment tools for opioid abuse leading to a more controlled opioid prescription practice. Dissemination of these tools will boost doctors' confidence and may help in reducing morbidity and mortality from opioid abuse.

Understanding the behavioural determinants of opioid prescribing among family physicians: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Longstanding variation in the views of family physicians (FPs) on the role of opioids seems to translate into widely varying prescribing rates. Improvement interventions are unlikely to achieve change if they do not understand and explicitly target the factors that determine physician prescribing behaviour. The aim of this work was to understand (1) the perspectives of FPs as it relates to opioid prescribing, and (2) the perceived barriers and enablers to guideline-adherent opioid prescribing and management of chronic non-cancer pain.

METHODS

A qualitative study involving one-on-one, semi-structured interviews with a sample of FPs in Ontario, Canada. Interviews were analyzed using a directed content analysis informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework. A framework approach was used to explore interaction across behavioural determinants (factors influencing behaviour) as well as demographic sources of variation. The behaviour of interest for the current study was the prescribing of opioid medications (including initiation, renewal, and dose reduction) for patients with chronic, non-cancer pain. Associated issues in the overall management of such patients were also explored.

RESULTS

Interviews were conducted with 22 FPs. Behavioural determinants interacted with one another to influence FPs prescribing behavior. The TDF domain Beliefs about Consequences played a central role in explaining physician prescribing behaviours as they related to the management of chronic non-cancer pain. Individual beliefs about prescribing consequences and patient behaviour interacted with prescriber beliefs about capabilities and perceptions of the FP's professional role to influence prescriber behaviour. Emotion and the environmental context influenced the impact of these determinants on opioid prescribing and the management of chronic non-cancer pain.

CONCLUSIONS

FPs face a wide range of complex (and often interacting) challenges when prescribing opioid therapy to their patients. Solution-based strategies should target these determinants directly using evidence-based strategies that move beyond guideline dissemination and general education. Shared decision-making strategies and patient-facing decision aids are likely to decrease the tension experienced in challenging conversations.

Healthcare provider knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices surrounding the prescription of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain in North America: protocol for a mixed-method systematic review

BACKGROUND

Evidence from diverse areas of medicine (e.g., cardiovascular disease, diabetes) indicates that healthcare providers (HCPs) often do not adhere to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) despite a clear indication to implement recommendations-a phenomenon commonly termed clinical inertia. There are a variety of reasons for clinical inertia, but HCP-related factors (e.g., knowledge, motivation, agreement with guidelines) are the most salient and amenable to intervention aimed to improve adherence. CPGs have been developed to support the safe and effective prescription of opioid medication for the management of chronic non-cancer pain. The extent of physician uptake and adherence to such guidelines is not yet well understood. The purpose of this review is to synthesize the published evidence about knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices that HCPs hold regarding the prescription of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.

METHODS

An experienced information specialist will perform searches of CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO bibliographic databases. The Cochrane library, PROSPERO, and the Joanna Briggs Institute will be searched for systematic reviews. Searches will be performed from inception to the present. Quantitative and qualitative study designs that report on HCP knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, or practices in North America will be eligible for inclusion. Studies reporting on interventions to improve HCP adherence to opioid prescribing CPGs will also be eligible for inclusion. Two trained graduate-level research assistants will independently screen articles for inclusion, perform data extraction, and perform risk of bias and quality assessment using recommended tools. Confidence in qualitative evidence will be evaluated using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Qualitative Reviews (GRADE-CERQual) approach. Confidence in quantitative evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach.

DISCUSSION

The ultimate goal of this work is to support interventions aiming to optimize opioid prescribing practices in order to prevent opioid-related morbidity and mortality without restricting a HCP's ability to select the most appropriate treatment for an individual patient.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018091640 .

Opioid prescribing and dispensing: Experiences and perspectives from a survey of community pharmacists practising in the province of Quebec

Background

Canada leads in opioid prescription and consumption rates, and this has resulted in high levels of opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Pharmacists' input could contribute significantly to understanding the disadvantages of opioid prescribing and dispensing and improving the service. This study aimed to examine the experiences of community pharmacists in relation to opioid prescribing and dispensing, with a focus on optimizing collaboration and communication.

Methods

An online survey was performed among pharmacists from the province of Quebec, Canada, in 2016. Pharmacists were eligible if registered and working in community pharmacies.

Results

In all, 542 questionnaires were analyzed (participation rate of 8.1%). Pharmacotherapy-related problems were reported in at least 50% of opioid prescriptions: additional drug(s) required (reported by 30% of pharmacists), interaction(s) between opioid(s) and other drug(s) (16%), physician did not meet the general issuing standards for opioid prescriptions (26%) and patient had mild to moderate pain that was easily managed by a nonopioid analgesic (20%). Half of the patients were reported as requesting anticipated refills, possibly indicating abuse or poor pain control. Most pharmacists (89.6%) reported needing to contact physicians in 1 to 3 out of 10 opioid prescriptions, but many pharmacists (71.8%, often or very often) reported difficulties communicating with physicians.

Conclusions

Pharmacists' observations of pharmacotherapy-related problems and patients' unusual behaviours reveal a significant number of issues related to opioid prescribing and dispensing in an outpatient setting. Improved collaboration between physicians and pharmacists appears mandatory to address the issues reported in this study.